I hate these legal nit pickers. It is an axiomatic necessity to verify the credentials of any candidate running for office, and ought not need specific coding in statute. Only a legal @sshole would assume this is a valid argument.
I would further offer the argument that if "New Jersey law did not require him to" verify credentials, then a 10 year old boy could run for President, and nobody would be able to challenge his credentials.
“I would further offer the argument that if “New Jersey law did not require him to” verify credentials, then a 10 year old boy could run for President, and nobody would be able to challenge his credentials.”
That would be an interesting approach. The challenged candidate could argue that a SoS has no authority to remove him from the ballot. The SoS would probably argue that they have no authority to investigate a candidate but if one is clearly ineligible (Eldridge Cleaver or the guy in New Hampshire) they could than make a decision.
In the case of New Jersey apparently every candidate except President has to provide proof of qualifications.